RE: [BUG] wifi: rtw88: Hard system freeze on RTL8821CE when power_save is enabled (LPS/ASPM conflict)

[Ping-Ke Shih]

LB F <goainwo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Oleksandr Havrylov <goainwo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > After extended testing with your DMI patch applied, the hard freeze is
> > gone. However, with ASPM disabled but LPS Deep still active, I observe
> > periodic h2c timeouts during idle which cause occasional WiFi throughput
> > drops and Bluetooth audio stuttering. When I additionally set
> > disable_lps_deep=Y, all symptoms disappear completely. This confirms
> > that combining the ASPM quirk with dynamic LPS_DEEP_MODE_NONE would be
> > the complete fix. Ready to test an updated patch if you decide to
> > include this.
> 
> Hi Ping-Ke,
> 
> While monitoring logs with the current patch applied, I noticed two
> things that might be useful.
> 
> First, the following message appears each time the driver loads:
> 
>   rtw88_8821ce 0000:13:00.0: can't disable ASPM; OS doesn't have ASPM control
> 
> This suggests the BIOS retains control over ASPM and prevents any
> OS-level override via pci_disable_link_state(). The system remains
> stable regardless, which confirms that the rtw_pci_disable_aspm flag
> approach in your patch is the correct and effective method here.

Not sure if this is because PCIE bridge has no ASPM capability?

> 
> Second, during normal operation I observe this warning periodically:
> 
>   WARNING: net/mac80211/rx.c:5491 at ieee80211_rx_list+0x177/0x1020 [mac80211]

LN5491 (kernel v6.19.6) is:

                case RX_ENC_VHT:
                        if (WARN_ONCE(status->rate_idx > 11 ||
                                      !status->nss ||
                                      status->nss > 8,
                                      "Rate marked as a VHT rate but data is invalid: MCS: %d, NSS: %d\n",
                                      status->rate_idx, status->nss))
                                goto drop;
                        break;

Looks like driver reports improper VHT nss/rate? But this warns once, and
you message isn't like this. 

Could you check the source code LN5491 you are using?

Ping-Ke